An armor-piercing shell is a type of ammunition designed to penetrate armor. From the 1860s to 1950s, a major application of armor-piercing projectiles was to defeat the thick armor carried on many warships. From the 1920s onwards, armor-piercing weapons were required for anti-tank missions.

An armor-piercing shell must withstand the shock of punching through armor plating. Shells designed for this purpose have a greatly strengthened case with a specially hardened and shaped nose, and a much smaller bursting charge. Some smaller-caliber AP shells have an inert filling, or incendiary charge in place of the HE bursting charge. The AP shell is now little used in naval warfare, as modern warships have little or no armor protection,[citation needed] but it remains the preferred round in tank warfare, as it has a greater "first-hit kill" probability than a high explosive anti-tank (HEAT) round, especially against a target with composite armor, and because of higher muzzle velocity, is also more accurate than a HEAT round.

Armor-piercing cartridges are also available as small arms ammunition, primarily for use as an anti-matériel round.

History

The late 1850s saw the development of the ironclad warship, which carried wrought iron armor of considerable thickness. This armor was practically immune to both the round cast-iron cannonballs then in use and to the recently-developed explosive shell. The first solution to this problem was effected by Major Sir W. Palliser, who invented a method of hardening the head of the pointed cast-iron shot. By casting the projectile point downwards and forming the head in an iron mold, the hot metal was suddenly chilled and became intensely hard (resistant to deformation), while the remainder of the mold, being formed of sand, allowed the metal to cool slowly and the body of the shot to be made tough (resistant to shattering).

These chilled iron shots proved very effective against wrought iron armor, but were not serviceable against compound and steel armor, which was first introduced in the 1880s. A new departure therefore had to be made, and forged steel rounds with points hardened by water took the place of the Palliser shot. At first, these forged-steel rounds were made of ordinary carbon steel, but as armor improved in quality, the projectiles followed suit.

During the 1890s and subsequently, cemented steel armor became commonplace, initially only on the thicker armor of warships. To combat this, the projectile was formed of steel - forged or cast - containing both nickel and chromium. Another change was the introduction of a soft metal cap over the point of the shell.

First World War Era

Shot and shell used prior to and during World War I were generally cast from special chromium (stainless) steel that was melted in pots. They were forged into shape afterward and then thoroughly annealed, the core bored at the rear and the exterior turned up in a lathe. The projectiles were finished in a similar manner to others described above. The final, or tempering treatment, which gave the required hardness/toughness profile (differential hardening) to the projectile body, was a closely guarded secret.

The rear cavity of these projectiles was capable of receiving a small bursting charge of about 2% of the weight of the complete projectile; when this is used, the projectile is called a shell, not a shot. The HE filling of the shell, whether fuzed or unfuzed, had a tendency to explode on striking armor in excess of its ability to perforate.

Second World War

British naval 15-inch capped armor-piercing shell, 1943

British naval 15-inch capped armor-piercing shell, 1943

During WWII, projectiles used highly alloyed steels containing nickel-chromium-molybdenum, although in Germany, this had to be changed to a silicon-manganese-chromium-based alloy when those grades became scarce. The latter alloy, although able to be hardened to the same level, was more brittle and had a tendency to shatter on striking highly sloped armor. The shattered shot lowered penetration, or resulted in total penetration failure; for armor-piercing high-explosive (APHE) projectiles, this could result in premature detonation of the HE filling. Highly advanced and precise methods of differentially hardening the projectile were developed during this period, especially by the German armament industry. The resulting projectiles gradually change from high hardness (low toughness) at the head to high toughness (low hardness) at the rear and were much less likely to fail on impact.

APHE shells for tank guns, although used by most forces of this period, were not used by the British. The only British APHE projectile was the Shell AP, Mk1 for the 2 pdr anti-tank gun and this was dropped as it was found that the fuze tended to separate from the body during penetration. Even when the fuze didn’t separate and the system functioned correctly, damage to the interior was little different from the solid shot, and so did not warrant the additional time and cost of producing a shell version. APHE projectiles of this period used a bursting charge of about 1-3% of the weight of the complete projectile, the filling detonated by a rear mounted delay fuze. The explosive used in APHE projectiles needs to be highly insensitive to shock to prevent premature detonation. The US forces normally used the explosive Explosive D, otherwise known as ammonium picrate, for this purpose. Other combatant forces of the period used various explosives, suitability desensitized (usually by the use of waxes mixed with the explosive).

Due to the increase in armor thickness during the conflict, the projectiles’ impact velocity had to be increased to ensure perforation. At these higher velocities, the hardened tip of the shot or shell has to be protected from the initial impact shock, or risk shattering. To raise the impact velocity and stop the shattering, they were initially fitted with soft steel penetrating caps. The best performance penetrating caps were not very aerodynamic, so an additional ballistic cap was later fitted to reduce drag. The resulting projectile types were given the names "Armor-Piercing Capped (APC)" and "Armor-Piercing Capped Ballistic Capped (APCBC)".

Early WWII-era uncapped AP projectiles fired from high-velocity guns were able to penetrate about twice their caliber at close range (100 m). At longer ranges (500-1,000 m), this dropped 1.5-1.1 calibers due to the poor ballistic shape and higher drag of the smaller-diameter early projectiles. Later in the conflict, APCBC fired at close range (100 m) from large-caliber, high-velocity guns (75-128 mm) were able to penetrate a much greater thickness of armor in relation to their caliber (2.5 times) and also a greater thickness (2-1.75 times) at longer ranges (1,500-2,000 m).

Modern Day

Armor-piercing shot

Armor-piercing "shot" for cannons tend to combine some form of incendiary capability with that of armor-penetration. The incendiary compound is normally contained between the cap and penetrating nose, within a hollow at the rear, or a combination of both. If the projectile also uses a tracer, the rear cavity is often used to house the tracer compound. For larger-caliber projectiles, the tracer may instead be contained within an extension of the rear sealing plug. Common abbreviations for solid (non-composite/hardcore) cannon-fired shot are; AP, AP-T, API and API-T; where T stands for "tracer" and I for "incendiary"

Armor-piercing shells

Armor-piercing shells in the classic form are not common in modern guns, though they may be found in the larger (40-57 mm) weapons, especially those of Russian- or Soviet-era descent. Modern guns instead fire semi-armor-piercing high-explosive (SAPHE) shells, which have less anti-armor capability, but far greater anti-materiel/personnel effects. The modern SAPHE projectiles still have a ballistic cap, hardened body and base fuze, but tend to have a far thinner body material and higher explosive content (4-15%). Common abbreviations for modern AP and SAP shells are: HEI(BF), SAPHE, SAPHEI and SAPHEI-T.

Most modern active protection systems (APS) are unlikely to be able to defeat full-caliber AP rounds fired from a large-caliber tank gun. The APS can defeat the two most common anti-armor projectiles in use today: HEAT and APFSDS. The defeat of HEAT projectiles is accomplished through damage/detonation of the HE filling or damage to the shaped charge liner and/or fuzing system, and defeat of APFSDS projectiles is accomplished by inducing yaw/pitch and/or fracturing of the rod. Due to the AP shot/shell's high mass, rigidity, short overall length, and thick body, they are hardly affected by the defeat methods employed by APS systems (fragmentation warheads or projected plates).

Rifle and pistol rounds are usually built around a penetrator of hardened steel or tungsten. Aircraft and tank rounds sometimes use a core of depleted uranium. The penetrator is a pointed mass of high-density material that is designed to retain its shape and carry the maximum possible amount of energy as deeply as possible into the target. Depleted-uranium penetrators have the advantage of being pyrophoric and self-sharpening on impact, resulting in intense heat and energy focused on a minimal area of the target's armor. Some rounds also use explosive or incendiary tips to aid in the penetration of thicker armor. High Explosive Incendiary/Armor Piercing Ammunition combines a tungsten carbide penetrator with an incendiary and explosive tip.

Rifle armor-piercing ammunition generally carries its hardened penetrator within a copper or cupronickel jacket, similar to the jacket which would surround lead in a conventional projectile. Upon impact on a hard target, the copper case is destroyed, but the penetrator continues its motion and penetrates the target. Armor-piercing ammunition for pistols has also been developed and uses a design similar to the rifle ammunition.

The entire projectile is not normally made of the same material as the penetrator because the physical characteristics that make a good penetrator (i.e. extremely tough, hard metal) make the material equally harmful to the barrel of the gun firing the cartridge.

Contrary to popular belief, Teflon or other coatings on a bullet do not help themselves to penetrate more deeply. Teflon coated bullets are designed purely to help reduce the wear on the barrel as a result of firing hardened projectiles. Teflon-coating bullets is a trend that has largely faded, in part because of laws resulting from this misconception[

Chinatungsten Online specializes in manufacturing, sourcing, importing, exporting and worldwide distribution of tungsten products. With more than 20 years experiences of tungsten business, we are now the top professional Chinese company in the fields of tungsten ore,oxide ,trioxide, acid, powder, carbide powder, tungsten carbide cutting and drilling tools, tips, insert, wear part, rare earth, tungsten heavy alloy, tungsten wire & heater, tungsten arc welding electrodes andothers about tungsten. We are very proud of our highest quality, best service and most competitive price. For any further technical info or pricing on tungsten, please contact us without any hesitation. Email: sales@chinatungsten.com Tel: +86 592 5129696 Fax: +86 592 5129797

Disclaimer: The article is only reflecting the opinions of the author. We have no responsibility to prove the originality and authenticity of the content, words and/or pictures. You readers should just take it as reference and check the details by yourselves. And the content is not a suggestion for investment decision. The investor takes his or her own risks if he or she operates accordingly. If you have any dissent about the contents above, please contact the relevant author, orthe webmaster. We will try our best to assist the dealing of the related issues. Thanks for your visit and cooperation.

If you need any more details of the above news and/or products, please visit Chinatungsten Online, or contact us directly.Disclaimer: The article is only reflecting the opinions of the author. We have no responsibility to prove the originality and authenticity of the content, words and/or pictures. You readers should just take it as reference and check the details by yourselves. And the content is not a suggestion for investment decision. The investor takes his or her own risks if he or she operates accordingly. If you have any dissent about the contents above, please contact the relevant author, or the webmaster. We will try our best to assist the dealing of the related issues. Thanks for your visit and cooperation.